22.11.2007

• Commonwealth Summit
• It is scheduled to commence from tomorrow in Kampala, Uganda.
• It appears to be divided on the issue of suspending Pakistan from the Commonwealth. But some countries are insisting that Pakistan should be suspended because of the imposition of emergency in that country. These countries base their argument on the fact that Zambia and Fiji were suspended when there was a reversal of democracy in those countries.
• India did not take any overt stance and is reported to have said that it is for CMAG (Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group) to take a call on the issue.
• Composition of the Nobel committee
• Though since 1977 members of Parliament have not been allowed to sit on the committee, it tends to be made up of former politicians or those with looser ties to their parties. It currently consists of one member each of the five biggest parties in the Norwegian Parliament.
• India’s infrastructure funding issues
• During the 11^th and 12^th plans, the envisaged investments are to the tune of Rs. 20.18 lakh crores and Rs. 40.55 lakh crores respectively.
• The capacity of the economy to absorb investment of this scale is dependent on:
• The regulatory environment for attracting private investment
• The intellectual capacity of managers – both public and private – to structure projects in a transparent and achievable way; and
• A ‘fire-in-the-belly’ attitude to deliver quality products before deadlines.
• Some good initiatives taken for streamlining contract award procedures include:
• Formulating model concession agreements
• Building viability gap funding windows; and
• Finalizing a panel of advisers to structure projects for the private sector.
• Some good political comment from TK Arun on Nandigram. Look at the excerpt below; but see the full article here.
• To equate Nandigram with Gujarat is absurd. Nandigram’s violent one-upmanship is localized, it does not lead to violence or insecurity and effectively disenfranchisement outside Nandigram. The politics of identity-based hatred that led to the savage, organized attack on Muslims in Gujarat in early 2002 perpetuates a social divide across the country, in whose cracks fester toxins that can yet consume the entire body politic. Nothing of the sort applies to Nandigram, however condemnable the killings there.
• Nandigram throws the spotlight on the failure of Left politics in India, failure to construct an emancipatory project within the framework of liberal democracy and participatory growth. One segment of the Left still eulogizes the authoritarian state capitalism of China and the erstwhile Soviet Union, and are determined to swim against the current of history. At the other end of the Left spectrum the Naxalites violently shrink whatever democratic space exists in rural life, instead of building on and expanding the freedom promised by the Constitution.
• Centre considering regulation of Sovereign Wealth Funds
• Since these are controlled by governments, it is felt that they would follow the agenda set by the country concerned. Management control of an Indian company slipping into hands of a fund owned by a hostile country could pose an enormous problem. There is also the issue of some of the countries promoting SWFs not enjoying market-economy status.
• Concerns about such investment entering into the country are expressed by the national security adviser.
• Most Gulf bonds don’t comply with Islamic law
• Known as sukuk (Islamic bonds), these are sold with a repurchase undertaking – a promise that the borrower will pay back their face value at maturity or in the even of default, mirroring the structure of a conventional bond.
• A promise to pay back capital violates the principle of risk – and profit-sharing on which the Islamic bonds should be based.
• Islam bans lending on interest as usury. What is allowed is risk-sharing and profit-sharing.